Assimilation, so called, of the gospels occurs, especial- ly of the synoptic gospels. This arose from the habit of noting in the margin of one gospel the words of an- other for comparison, illustration, or a more fidl and sat- isfactory statement. In Matt, xxv, 13, at the close of the parable of the ten virgins, the Saviour adds, "Watch therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour." A copyist added, most probablv from the margin, the words of Luke xii, 40, " wherein the Son of man Cometh." The words added are not in A, li, X, C, D, L, X, A, and are found only in C^, F, H'. In Matt, ix, 13 the Saviour's assertion is, "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." To this the copyist added the marginal gloss from Luke v, 32, ag fitravoiav, found in later uncials, but not in B, X, D, etc. In Luke xx, 23, rt ^lE TTttpa^ETe (A, C, D, P), omitted B, X, L, was probably added from Matt, xxii, 18 ; iMark xii, 15. In Mark xiii, 14, "spoken of by Daniel the pro|)het," is transferred from Matt, xxiv, 15. Luke xvii, 30, omitted in all the uncials except D, U, was inserted from Matt, xxiv, 40. In Matt. XX, 22, "and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with," in later uncials, but not in B, X, D, L, Z, is taken from Mark x, 38. In Matt, v, 44, "bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you," and the words "them that despitefully use j'ou," are transferred from Luke vi, 27, 28. In Luke v, 38, " and both are preserved," is from Matt, ix, 17. In xxvii, 35 the whole verse, after the words " casting lots," is from John xix, 24. The same tendencv to supplement one account by another, or to harmonize two accounts of the same occurrence, is seen in Acts ix, 5, 6, where all from (TKXrjpov in ver. 5 to Trpog avrov in ver. 6 is from xxvi, 14, 15.
Supplementing of quotations from the Old Test, only partially cited by the sacred writer: Matt, xv, 8, where " This people honoreth me with their lips" (omitting "draweth nigh unto me with their mouth") is the true reading; and Mark i, 2, "shall prepare thy way" (omit- ting "before thee"). Scrivener (Ma7iual ofTexf. Crit. p. 12) notes the following supplements: Luke iv, 18, " to heal the broken-hearted ;" Acts vii, 37, " him shall ye hear;" Rom. xiii, 9, "thou shalt not bear false wit- ness;" Heb. ii, 7, "and didst set him over the works of thy hands;" xii, 20, "or thrust through with a dart."
Other supplementary additions came into the text from the margins of MSS. fitted for reading the church lessons, and from lectionaries, church rituals, and litur- gies. It was necessarj' to prefix to each lesson its prop- er title, or an introductorj' clause, or the name of the person or class addressed or speaking. In Acts iii, 11, the title of the lesson, rov laSreuToi; ;^wXoi>, has come in place of the original avrov. The latter is the read- ing of A, B, X, C,"D, E; the former is found in the later uncial P and in cursives. In Luke vii, 31 it was necessary to prefix to the lesson the introductory clause Hire Ct 6 Kvpiog ; found in cursives and the later
VARIOUS READINGS
724
VARIOUS READINGS
uncial M, wanting in A, B, X, D, L, X, A. The name of the one addressed, or speaking, or acting, must often be inserted. Hence l/jcroi;, in place of arrov. Matt, viii, 5; ii](TOvc added, iv, 18; xiv, 22; transferred from the last clause to the first in John i, 44. In Acts viii, 37, without douljt a marginal note came in from the bap- tismal formula of a church ritual; wanting in the early MSS. A, 15, X, C, II, L, P, and feebly accredited other- wise. In 1 John V, 7, 8, from ei' rai ovpav()) to iv Tr\ yi] is now regarded as spurious by all textual critics. '■ They were originally brought into Latin copies in Africa from the margin, where they had been placeil as a pious and orthodox gloss on ver. 8" (Scrivener, Man- ual of Text. Criticism, 2d ed. p. 556. who reviews the con- troversy respecting the passage, with a full statement of the evidence on both sides). In Matt, vi, 13, from oTi (Tov to the end, the doxologj' is wanting in the old- est uncials, B, N, D, Z (A, C, P are defective here), and on other diplomatic grounds is discredited by most textual critics. It probably originated in the early liturgies of the Church. The passage in John vii, 53- viii, 11, bracketed as doubtful in some critical editions and omitted in others, is regarded as authentic history, the record of an actual occurrence in the life of Jesus. The question of its genuineness is fully discussed by Lange (Commentary, Amer. ed. p. 268-271, and the chief authorities on both sides are stated by Dr. SchaflF, p. 267). The passage in Mark xvi, 9-20, omitted in B (though a column is significantly left vacant) and in X, is found in A, C, D, E, F, G, H, M, S, U, V, X, P, A, H (see the full statement of the question of its genuine- ness in Scrivener, Introd. to Text. Crit. p. 507-513).